MB4-00066

MB4-00066

The RAD found the documents filed on appeal inadmissible under s.110(4) IRPA, conducted an independent review with deference to the RPD's live credibility findings, concluded the RPD's negative credibility findings were justified and supported by the record, and therefore confirmed the RPD decision rejecting the refugee protection claims.

Citation
MB4-00066
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Appellant (minor): XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Appellant (minor): XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
7 October 2015
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal Under Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / RAD Decision Following Federal Court Remittal (appeal Heard and Dismissed by Rad)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD determination confirmed that appellants are not Convention refugees under s.96 IRPA nor persons in need of protection under s.97 IRPA.
Legal Topics
Credibility Assessment, Admissibility of New Evidence (s.110(4) Irpa), Oral Hearing Threshold (s.110(6) Irpa), Female Genital Mutilation/fgm, Deference to Tribunal Findings
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Protection Law Administrative Law Evidentiary Law Credibility Assessment Admissibility of New Evidence (s.110(4) Irpa) Oral Hearing Threshold (s.110(6) Irpa) Female Genital Mutilation/fgm +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Appellant (minor)

XXXX XXXX

Appellant (minor)

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal Under Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / RAD Decision Following Federal Court Remittal (appeal Heard and Dismissed by Rad)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Were documents filed on appeal admissible under s.110(4) IRPA?
  2. 2 Whether RAD should hold a hearing under s.110(6) IRPA
  3. 3 Whether the RPD erred in assessing credibility of appellant and children

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD found the documents filed on appeal inadmissible under s.110(4) IRPA, conducted an independent review with deference to the RPD's live credibility findings, concluded the RPD's negative credibility findings were justified and supported by the record, and therefore confirmed the RPD decision rejecting the refugee protection claims.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD determination confirmed that appellants are not Convention refugees under s.96 IRPA nor persons in need of protection under s.97 IRPA.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • RPD decision of December 13, 2013 is confirmed